Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Topic Date User

The Irish Solution to The Ben Lomond Problem 23-Sep-2017 At 11:17:20 AM johny

Message

>I can't think of anywhere that was bolt free that suddenly became a mess
>of bolt after the addition of a set of anchors. The Pt perp stuff came
>decades after the anchors in and bolts already existed. The odd old qlder
>moans about replacing the stupid tree ancors at Frog with bolts, but the
>bloody ugly bolts of elven king and others even older have existed for
>yonks. Bolts existed at araps 40 years before anchors became more common.
>I've a vague recollection about people wanting to keep rosea bolt free
>when it was suggested some tree achors that had burnt be replaced by bolts.
>Except that it had bolted routes dating back to the 80s .... Maybe you
>can point me in the direction of a bolting controversy at an actually bolt
>free crag that actually started from a single rap anchor put in with the
>intention of it being just a single rap anchor?

Hey Wendy, I really get the feeling that you are out to win a debate with generalized sometimes irrelevant arguments more than recognizing the specifics around Ben Lomond. You previously used a straw man reductio ad adsurdum with the gay marriage argument to dismiss all slippery slope arguments. Now you are asserting that there never was a bolt free crag so therefore there is no precedent of a bolt free crag that slid into a sport crag so therefore it is irrational to think it will happen at Ben Lomond. Both might get points in a high school debate but they don't work well with climbing!

I think it is idiotic to justify sport routes because of the existence of bolted abseils. I also think that there are enough idiots that it is possible it could happen. I don't think having several bolted rap stations at Ben Lomond would ruin the place. I do like the romantic notion of a bolt free crag. Also I want to point out that I don't think it is idiotic to want sport climbs at Ben Lomond. I don't want sport climbs at the Ben but respect peoples opinion who do. I think simply wanting sport climbs at Ben Lomond is a pretty damn good reason for bolts by itself so you don't need to make up weird justifications. All of the areas you listed have controversial bolts. You personally have had bolts chopped. So thanks for proving the point for Gerry.

I think its awesome that the Ben is bolt free. Sure it's contrived. Of course bolts are traditionally part of climbing. But using mostly historical precedents to make your case as if its a legal briefing really is a little off. Climbers realized early that any summit could be obtained with enough bolts and time. Aid became free climbing. Bolts gave way to nuts and clean aid climbing. Its about style. Traditional climbing was not invented on a certain date with a constitution itemized by bullet pointed rules people could invoke to win arguments online. Its a spirit of adventure about bringing your own skills to meet the challenges in the hills. I am more for a bolt free Ben because of this than because of the slippery slope argument which I totally agree is weak.

Hey Wendy you have a really good sense of humor and I agree with most of your comments. And also I don't think its wrong to have a good shot at presenting your side in a debate. I was just pointing out that i think you missed what I think is the most compelling part of Gerry's position in that it is a romantic ideal to keep the place bolt free.

This summer there will be a whole bunch more new bolt free routes at Ben Lomond. I hope everyone gets down there and gets amongst it!